ifficulty. It may prove
that he was credulous, but not that he belonged to a later than the
apostolic age. The ancients represent this Clement to have been
identical with _Clement bishop of Rome_. Whether he was also identical
with the Clement named by the apostle Paul (Phil. 4:3), is a question
that we may well leave undecided. The epistle was written shortly after
some persecution (chap. 1), which Grabe, Hefele, and others suppose to
have been that under Nero; Lardner, Cotelerius, and others, that under
Domitian. Upon the former supposition it was written about A.D. 68--a
supposition apparently favored by the way in which he refers to the
temple and service at Jerusalem as still in existence (chaps. 40, 41);
upon the latter, about A.D. 96 or 97.

3. The _occasion_ of the epistle, which Clement writes in the name of
the church at Rome, is easily gathered from its contents. As in the days
of Paul, so now, the Corinthian church was troubled by a "wicked and
unholy sedition," fomented by "a few rash and self-willed men," who had
proceeded so far as to thrust out of their ministry some worthy men.
Chap. 44. It would seem, also, from chaps. 24-27 that there were among
them those who denied the doctrine of the resurrection. To restore in
the Corinthian church the spirit of love and unity is the grand scope of
the epistle. The author commends them for their orderly and holy
deportment before their present quarrel arose, traces it to its true
source in the pride gendered by the honor and enlargement granted them
by God, and urges them to lay aside their contentions by every motive
that the gospel offers--the mischiefs that strife occasions, the rules
of their religion, the example of the Saviour and holy men of all ages,
the relation of believers to God, his high value of the spirit of love
and unity, the reward of obedience and punishment of disobedience, etc.
Comparing the church to an army, he insists earnestly on the necessity
of different ranks and orders, and the spirit of obedience. Comparing it
again to the human body, he shows that all the particular members, each
in his place, should conspire together for the preservation of the
whole.

Clement's style has not the merit of compactness and conciseness. He is,
on the contrary, diffuse and repetitious. But a thoroughly evangelical
spirit pervades the present epistle, and it is, moreover, characterized
by a noble fervor and simplicity. "It evinces the calm dignity and t